Question Number: 32628

Law 12 - Fouls and Misconduct 8/5/2018

RE: Select Under 19

Keith T of Las Vegas, NV USA asks...

This question is a follow up to question 32623

One aspect of this whole thread that wasnt addressed: if advantage is truly realized after a tactical foul or DOGSO, is it really appropriate to card the offender at the next stoppage? The law doesnt mention attempt but actually stopping a promising attack or actually denying a goal-scoring opportunity"so if advantage was maintained why do we still sanction? In that case the attack remained promising or the goal-scoring opportunity was not denied (albeit attempted). Thanks.

Answer provided by Referee Richard Dawson

HI Kieth ,
YES it IS really appropriate to show the card at the next stoppage as THAT was the exact nature of the foul and cannot be permitted to go without sanction. . The advantage clause is there is to prevent the foul from stopping the attack or scoring opportunity. The fact that there is ADDITIONAL misconduct of a cautionable or even sendoff event MUST in law be issued prior to ANY restart of play. WE are not restarting with the old foul we are simply showing the card to remind the culprit the NATURE of that foul earlier was unacceptable. Remember DOGSO actions that FAIL are not red cards if a goal results off an advantage but they are still punished as acts of USB. A RECKLESS tackle where we play advantage, we do not come back for the foul but the MISCONDUCT of that type of foul is a SEPERATE matter . If it is only a careless foul there would be no further sanctions after a realized advantage.
Cheers

Answer provided by Referee Joe McHugh

Hi Keith
The Law tells us that there are times when a player must be caution which includes the following clause which states and I quote ** commits a foul which interferes with or stops a promising attack except where the referee awards a penalty kick for an offence which was an attempt to play the ball**
So in this instance the foul ITOOTR interfered with a promising attack.
The decision though of determining interference in a promising attack is left to the individual referee.
So we have all been there in that we have not cautioned on advantage for a variety of reasons including where we opined the foul had no significant impact on play.
In our game at the weekend I was an AR and a defender tried to pull back an attacker, he let go, the attacker raced on with the ball and dragged the shot wide of the post. The CR decided not to caution and he felt that the foul did not merit a card. I was somewhat expecting a card yet it was his decision.

Answer provided by Referee Peter Grove

Hi Keith,
Yes it is appropriate to caution a player for an act of unsporting behaviour, even when the advantage has been played. The fact that the referee allowed play to go on to see if the team that was offended against could benefit from the advantage, does not negate the unsporting behaviour that occurred.

The idea that the referee can go back and caution a player even after playing the advantage is pretty much explicitly stated in the following wording:

''If the referee plays the advantage for an offence for which a caution / send off would have been issued had play been stopped, this caution / send off must be issued when the ball is next out of play ...''